latino youth and the pathway to college - eric · 2014. 6. 9. · latino youth and the pathway to...

Latino Youth and the Pathway to College

by Dr. Watson Scott Swail

President, Educational Policy Institute

Dr. Alberto F. Cabrera Senior Scholar, Educational Policy Institute Professor, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Mr. Chul Lee

Research Associate Educational Policy Institute

June 23, 2004

Latino Youth and the Pathway to College 2

Table of Contents

Table of Figures............................................................................................................................. 2

Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... 4

Prelude ........................................................................................................................................... 8

Introduction................................................................................................................................... 9

Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 11

Postsecondary Pathways ........................................................................................................... 11

College Qualifications of Latino Students...................................................................... 12

Earning a Bachelor’s Degree............................................................................................. 19

Background Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 22

Preparation for Postsecondary Studies ................................................................................... 24

Aspirations.......................................................................................................................... 25

Academic Preparation....................................................................................................... 26

High School Completion................................................................................................... 29

The Postsecondary Experience ................................................................................................. 30

Participation at the Postsecondary Level ....................................................................... 30

Attendance Patterns .......................................................................................................... 36

Postsecondary Completion............................................................................................... 38

Risk Factors......................................................................................................................... 40

Summary and Conclusion......................................................................................................... 43

Appendix A. Data Tables .......................................................................................................... 46

Appendix B. Methodology........................................................................................................ 51

References .................................................................................................................................... 55

Table of Figures

Exhibit Title Page


Exhibit 1. Pathways to baccalaureate degree attainment for 1000 NELS 8th grade cohort .......................................................................................................16

Exhibit 2. Family Income of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort.............................................23

Exhibit 3. Highest parental education of 1988 8th grade cohort ..................................24

Exhibit 4. Highest degree planned by students in the 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort in 8th grade ............................................................................................25

Exhibit 5. Distribution of 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort by level of academic preparedness ......................................................................................................27

Exhibit 6. Highest level of mathematics completed during high school by 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort ...........................................................................28

Exhibit 7. Percent of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort that received a high school diploma or GED.................................................................................................29

Exhibit 8. Percent distribution of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort by postsecondary participation ............................................................................31

Exhibit 9. Percentage distribution of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort postsecondary participators by type of institution participated ................32

Exhibit 10. Percentage distribution of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort by type of institution participated .....................................................................................33

Exhibit 11. Selectivity of postsecondary institution attended by 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort who went on to postsecondary education .......................34

Exhibit 12. Average tuition fees for 1st postsecondary institution attended by 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort ...........................................................................35

Exhibit 13. Number of months between high school graduation and entry into postsecondary for 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort....................................36

Exhibit 14. Percent of postsecondary students from the 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort who attended postsecondary institutions on a part-time basis. ....................................................................................................................37

Exhibit 15. Percent of postsecondary students from the 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort who maintained continuous enrollment while in PSE ....................38

Exhibit 16. Highest postsecondary degree attained by 2000 (eight years after scheduled high school graduation) by 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort.........39

Exhibit 17. Time to bachelor degree completion for 1988 8th grade cohort...................40

Exhibit 18. At-risk factors for Latino students versus all students of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort .....................................................................................42

Exhibit 19. Number of risk factors for 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort..............................43


Executive Summary

The act of going to college and earning a degree is more important than ever to today’s youth and our society. Individuals with A bachelor’s degree earn much more than high school graduates, and society as a whole also gains from an educated citizenry. Unfor-tunately, access to a postsecondary education is not equal in America. Students histori-cally underrepresented at the postsecondary level—students of color, those from low-income backgrounds, and first-generation students—are still less likely to prepare for, apply for, en-roll in, and persist through postsecondary education.

This study was conducted by the Educational Policy Institute through a grant from the Pew Hispanic Center to provide the most up-to-date analysis of Latino achievement through postsecondary education. What follows is our analysis of the latest installment of the National Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS), begun in 1988 with eighth grade students and followed up several times, with the last follow-up survey in 2000: eight years after scheduled high school graduation.

This report outlines the pathway to and through postsecondary education for Latinos and other students, and looks at a number of variables which offer insight into how mo-tivated and prepared these students are for postsecondary work. The following is a summary of the study findings.

Main Findings Family Income. Over half of Latino students came from families with incomes less than $25,000 a year, while only 7.5 percent had a family income of $75,000 or higher. Only 23 percent of white students came from families below the $25,000 level, and 18.3 percent were $75,000 and above.

Educational Legacy. Seventy-two percent of NELS youth had at least one parent with postsecondary experience, 30 percent of whom had achieved at least a bachelor’s degree. Conversely, only half (49.4 percent) of Latino youth had a parent who had gone to col-lege, and only 14.1 percent had received a bachelor’s degree or higher—half the rate of the national average.

Aspirations. Seventy-three percent of Latinos aspired to postsecondary education, but only 55 percent—a full 20 percent lower than the national average—aspired to a BA. The aspirations of Latino students in the US were the lowest of any other group in our analy-sis, thus a cause for concern to policymakers.


Academic Preparation. A high proportion of Latino and African American students were classified as not qualified for postsecondary education. For Latinos, 59 percent of students were characterized as such, compared to 44 percent of the total NELS cohort and 41 percent for White students. Looking at the other end of the qualification spec-trum, approximately twice the percent of White students were qualified for higher edu-cation than Latinos and African Americans. Only 1 in 4 Latino students were qualified for the postsecondary world.

Risk Factors. Latinos have, on average, more risk factors than any other student group except African Americans. Almost half of all Latino students, or 49.2 percent, have three or more risk factors, compared to a cohort average of 31.6 and a White average of 25.4 percent.

Risk areas where Latinos were overrepresented include parents without a high school degree, low-family income, having sibling dropouts, being held back in school, changing schools, earning a C or less GPA, and bearing children while still in high school.

Mathematics Course Taking Statistics. Latinos are much more likely to complete their public education with lower-level courses than other students. In fact, over 58 percent of Latino students finished with standard geometry and never proceeded any further in the mathematics discipline. Comparatively, 44 percent of all students and 41 percent of White students discontinued their mathematics studies at this level. Latinos completed calculus at half the rate of all students.

High School Completion. On average, 92.3 percent of the NELS 8th grade cohort re-ceived a high school diploma, GED, or equivalent credential by 2000. Comparatively, 86.4 percent of Latinos received their high school credential, the lowest of the groups observed. Almost 10 percent of Latino students received a GED rather than the tradi-tional diploma. High School completion patterns exhibited by Whites lay in exact oppo-sition to Latino students’ pattern. The vast majority of Whites secured a standard high school diploma (86.4 percent). Only 6.8 percent of White students obtained a GED or other high school equivalency.

Participation at the Postsecondary Level. For the eighth-grade NELS cohort, 72.6 per-cent of students went on to some form of postsecondary study by 2000, or eight years past scheduled high school graduation. Sixty-six percent of Latino students enrolled and participated in postsecondary education, compared to 74.5 percent of White students and 90 percent of Asian Americans.

Four-Year Enrollment. Of the original eighth-grade cohort, 37.3 percent made their ini-tial enrolment at the four-year level. By comparison, only 22.1 percent of Latinos—almost half the four-year participation rate of Whites (40.8), enrolled at the four-year level.


Two-Year Enrollment. A much higher percent of the original cohort of Latinos, 40 per-cent, participates at two-year schools compared to other student groups (32.3 percent on average).

Matriculation to Higher Education. Almost all students considered college “qualified” went on to higher education, regardless of race/ethnicity. However, because only 277 out of 1000 Latinos were categorized as such, there were far fewer qualified Latino students in postsecondary education than White students.

Institutional Sector. Seventy-eight percent of NELS postsecondary students enrolled at a publicly-controlled postsecondary institution, with 19 percent enrolling at private, not-for-profit institutions. Latinos were more likely to enroll at public institutions (83.2 per-cent) than other student groups and the least likely to enroll at private, not-for-profit in-stitutions.

Institutional selectivity. Latino students were much less likely to attend selective insti-tutions than other students. In fact, only 7.7 percent of Latino students attending a post-secondary institution enrolled in either a selective or highly selective institution, com-pared to 15 and 30 percent of White and Asian American students, respectively.

Institutional Cost. Latinos were more likely to attend institutions with a lower average tuition charges than other students. On average, students from our 8th grade cohort at-tend postsecondary institution that cost $5,646 on average, while Latino students at-tended institutions costing $3,978.

Delayed Postsecondary Entry. Approximately one-of-five students (19.3 percent) de-layed entry into postsecondary education after high school, compared to 23.3 percent of Latinos students.

Attendance Patterns. Latino students were much more likely to attend postsecondary education on a part-time basis than other students. Of the total cohort that went on to postsecondary education, 38.6 percent of students attended on a part-time basis. How-ever, over half (51.8 percent) of Latino students that enrolled in postsecondary education attended part-time.

Continuous enrolment. On average, 43 percent of Latinos maintained continuous en-rolment in postsecondary education, compared to 62.9 percent of the entire cohort and 67 percent of White students.

Postsecondary Completion. Of only those eighth-grade students that went on to post-secondary studies, 43.4 percent received a bachelor’s degree and 12.6 percent received a certificate or associate’s degree. Forty-four percent of those who went on to postsecond-ary education did not receive a degree by 2000. Among Latinos, only 23.2 percent re-ceived a bachelor’s degree and 12.8 percent a certificate or associate’s degree. Almost


two thirds (64 percent) of Latinos who entered postsecondary education did not receive a degree by 2000.

Time to degree. Forty-two percent of students who completed at BA did so within four years, compared to 23 percent of Latino students. However, 42.5 percent of Latino stu-dents completed their BA beyond the five-year mark, suggesting that Latino students, for a variety of reasons, take extra time to degree—but they do get the degree.

Earned BA. More than twice as many White students from a universe of 1000 students who initially enrolled at a four-year institution earned a BA compared to Latino stu-dents. According to our analysis, 318 White students from the original eighth-grade uni-verse of 1000 students initially enrolled at a four-year institution and graduated with a bachelor’s degree. Within the Latino cohort, only 142, or 14.2 percent, traveled and com-pleted the same path.

Chance for a BA among Eighth-Grade Students. Among all eighth grade students, 15.2 percent of Latino youth earned a BA within 8 years of scheduled high school graduation, compared to 35.7 percent of White students. This results in a projected BA ratio of 2:1 of Whites to Latinos in the eighth grade.

Summary and Conclusion The challenges facing Latino students on their pathway to college are enormous at best, impossible at worst. At almost every level of this analysis, Latino youth face an upward struggle. The impact of these forces is to suppress the educational opportunity for these youth and lead them to a future that requires more effort to keep on current standing with other students, much less than trying to climb up the ladder of opportunity.

Considering the impending demographic changes in the US, policymakers must renew their commitment to the education of all students, which can only be done through broad social programming. Comprehensive and radical reform effort of the education of youth from low-income populations along the entire K-16 system are necessary to real-ize genuine change.

Unfortunately, the recent budget crisis is handcuffing legislators. The excesses of the 1990s provided ample opportunity and resources to deal with many of these issues, but those opportunities have been squandered through imprudent tax cuts and other policy decisions. It is our hope that the data in this report will spark a renewed commitment to the education of Latino youth and other disadvantaged students.


Prelude

Juan is an eighth-grade Latino youth in a Houston school where most of the students

look like him. He likes school and plans to graduate from high school and go to college,

probably at one of the state colleges close to home. He hopes one day to be an engineer

and work for one of the aerospace companies in the Houston area. Juan is different from

many of his friends. They aspire to college, but haven’t looked at what it takes to make it

there. Sometimes students make fun of Juan, but he shrugs it off and keeps planning.

Not far away from Juan is Susan, also an eighth grade student. Susan is White and goes

to school in one of Houston’s suburban school districts. Most of the students in her

school look her. Like Juan, she has grand plans to graduate from high school and earn a

business degree from UT Austin. She is an achiever and she and her parents, both pro-

fessionals, have no doubt of her impending success. It’s in the cards.

At the eighth grade, most students like Juan and Susan share aspirations for life and ca-

reer beyond high school, and most see postsecondary education as the lever to make

that happen. This is what we expect and hope for—that our youth aspire to great

things—for themselves and society. However, the truth is that aspirations among some

eighth grade students erode as they continue through the public school system. Almost

all students expect to go to college, the vast majority of students end up going, but only

a relatively small number of students complete a bachelor’s degree. For students whose

parents went to college, who come from moderate to high income families, and who are

from two-parent homes, aspirations generally turn into action and opportunity. For stu-

dents at the other end of the spectrum—those whose parents didn’t finish high school,

are from low-income backgrounds, and are being raised by a single parent, the opportu-

nities are reduced and aspirations vaporize within a few short years.

It’s uplifting that Juan has great aspirations for aerospace engineering, because his drive

and the help of peers and family will be critical in reaching the next level. Juan has, on


average, a 1 in 7 chance of earning a bachelor’s degree and reaching his goal. If he is

academically prepared for college, his chances rise to almost 50:50, but if he carries the

risk factors that more often beset Latino students than other students, his chances dwin-

dle considerably.

Susan, on the other hand, enjoys an easier road to success. On average, students like

Susan have a 1 in 3 chance of earning a BA. Because Susan is a high achiever, her actual

chances of earning a BA jump to 2:3. If she initially enrolls at a four-year institution, her

chances skyrocket to four-in-five.

This is the reality in America for Latino students versus their White counterparts. The

road to success has more bumps, barriers, and detours than for most other students, but

the road still exists. The pathway to success for Latino youth requires a motivation to

succeed, a plan of action, a willingness and need to act on one’s intentions, and perhaps

most importantly, a support system of family, friends, teachers, and community to help

them reach toward their goals.

We think Juan has a fair chance at meeting his goals because of his commitment, albeit

the barriers that lay in his path. We’re not too worried about Susan—her support system

is in place. But for all the Juans in America, we understand that more must be done. To

ensure that aspirations don’t vaporize into thin air, public policy must do more to elimi-

nate the barriers to future opportunity and provide truly real hope for millions of stu-

dents across the country.

Introduction

The act of going to college and earning a degree is more important than ever to today’s

youth and our society. Individuals with a bachelor’s degree have an opportunity earn as


much as double what a high school graduate earns over a lifetime; those with profes-

sional degrees earn triple.

Beyond the individual returns, society as a whole also gains from an educated citizenry.

The private sector becomes more competitive, tax resources increase, and other public

issues, such as public safety, are affected.

Unfortunately, access to a postsecondary education is not equal in America. Students

historically underrepresented at the postsecondary level—students of color, those from low-

income backgrounds, and first-generation students—are still less likely to prepare for, apply

for, enroll in, and persist through postsecondary education (Cabrera & La Nasa, 2000).

Latino students, as other visible minorities, fit this profile. Following high school 65 per-

cent of Latinos go on to a two- or four-year institution, compared to 74.5 percent of

White students. At the four-year level, Latinos enroll at about half the rate of White stu-

dents. Less than one-quarter of Latino youth receive a postsecondary certificate or de-

gree.

This study was conducted by the Educational Policy Institute through a grant from the

Pew Hispanic Center to provide the most up-to-date analysis of Latino achievement

through postsecondary education. What follows is our analysis of the latest installment

of the National Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS), begun in 1988 with eighth

grade students and followed up several times, with the last follow-up survey in 2000—

eight years after scheduled high school graduation. This latest version of the NELS data-

base includes transcript data from postsecondary institutions, thus eliminating self-

reported information on academic performance, type of postsecondary education at-

tended, and type of postsecondary degree attained. Transcript data provides a far more

accurate picture of Latino educational program than any prior study to date.

Throughout this study, we look mostly at how Latinos compare with all students, but

also provide comparisons with White, Asian, and African American students. In addi-


tion to background descriptive data, we look at a number of variables which offer in-

sight into how motivated and prepared these students are for postsecondary work, risk

factors that inhibit progress, and details about their educational pathway.

The discussion is supported by exhibits from our analysis, and the reader will find a se-

ries of tables at the end of this report for review.

Methodology

The sample for this study was drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of 1988 8th

grade cohort. The NELS:88 tracks nearly 15,000 1988 eight graders with follow-up sur-

veys in 1990 (10th grade), 1992 (12th grade), 1994 (2 years out of high school), and 2000 (8

years out of high school). Two databases were employed in this report: the NELS:

88/2000 (CD# 2003-348) and the Postsecondary transcript study (NELS: 88/2000 (PETS),

CD# 2003-402). The PETS reports the results of an exhaustive examination of college

transcripts from all postsecondary institutions student reported attendance between

1992 and 2000 (Adelman, Berkovits & Owens, 2003).

Further details on our analytical procedures and definitions of variables can be found in

the Appendix B on page 51 of this report.

Postsecondary Pathways

We begin our analysis by looking at the big picture of postsecondary education. Of im-

portance is the pathway to postsecondary success and where students fall out of the

pipeline. Using the NELS data, we’ve adjusted our calculations to approximate a uni-

verse of 1,000 eighth grade students from the 1988 NELS cohort and how those students

flow from eighth grade to a bachelor’s degree. We have also introduced a college quali-


fication variable, as first defined by Berkner and Chavez (1997). The college-qualification

index attempts to approximate college admissions criteria using cumulative academic

course GPA, senior class rank, the 1992 NELS aptitude test scores, and the SAT and

ACTS scores. More information on this index may be found in Appendix B.

College Qualifications of Latino Students Exhibit 1 on page 13 illustrates the college qualification levels of Latino and White stu-

dents. Our analysis uses three classifications of college qualifications: not qualified,

minimally qualified, and qualified.

As illustrated, 557 Latino students from our 1000 student universe were considered “not

qualified” for college, 166 “minimally qualified,” and 277 “qualified” for postsecondary

education. These rates compare to 390 not-qualified, 136 minimally qualified, and 474

qualified White students. In comparison to White students, Latinos were overrepre-

sented by 17 percent at the not-qualified level, for a numerical difference of 167 students.

Said differently, out of a 1000 student universe, 167 more Latino students were consid-

ered underprepared for postsecondary education than White students.


Exhibit 1. College Qualifications of 1988 NELS 8th grade Latinos and White students.

0

200

400

600

Not Qualified Minimally Qualified Qualified

Enro

lmen

ts

Latino

White Students

SOURCE: US Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS: 88/2000, 2003-402).

At the minimally-qualified level, 166 Latino students represent an overrepresentation of

only 3 percent compared to White students, a figure more at par than at the not-

qualified level. However, at the “qualified level, the trend reverses. Now Latino students

are far underrepresented compared to White students. Of the 1,000 student cohort, only

277 Latino students, slightly more than one-in-four, are considered qualified for college-

level work. Conversely, almost half of all White students, or 47.4 percent, are similarly

qualified. The impact of this dynamic is that for every 1,000 eighth grade students from

the NELS cohort, 200 more White students are academically qualified for postsecondary

education than Latino students. Reduced to a smaller ratio, for every 7 college-qualified

Latino students there are 12 similarly-qualified White students. The situation is some-

what reversed at the not-qualified end of the distribution, where for every 7 non-

qualified White students there are 10 non-qualified Latino students.


Using this information as our baseline, we are now set to take three passes through the

postsecondary pipeline: the first for those eighth-grade students considered “not quali-

fied,” the second for those considered “minimally qualified,” and the third for college

“qualified” students.

Not-Qualified Students

Although a much higher number of not-qualified Latino students in our cohort do not

go on to postsecondary studies, the percentage of not-qualified students attending post-

secondary education is slightly higher than similarly-qualified White students (46 versus

43 percent). However, Latino students from this group are underrepresented at the four-

year level and overrepresented at the two-year level in comparison to White students.

Postsecondary participation. Approximately 240 of the 557 non-qualified Latino stu-

dents, or 43 percent, failed to pursue any type of postsecondary education. Thus, one

quarter of all Latino youth were not qualified and did not go on to postsecondary educa-

tion. Within the White cohort, 183 students did not go on to postsecondary studies, or 47

percent of the White non-qualified cohort (or 18.3 percent of all White 8th grade stu-

dents).

Four-year enrolment. About the same number of non-qualified Latino and White stu-

dents enroll at the four-year level (52 vs. 50). This is significant because the number of

non-qualified White students is approximately one-third (30 percent) less than Latino

students. Still, the number of four-year students from this non-qualified pool is the

same.

Two-year enrolment. A much larger group of non-qualified Latino students enroll at the

two-year level than do White students. In total, 245 non-qualified Latino students, or 44

percent of all non-qualified Latinos, enroll in a two-year institution. Comparatively, 143

non-qualified White students, or 37 percent of the non-qualified White students, simi-

larly enrolled in a two-year institution.


For Latinos, this is significant. One quarter of all Latino eighth grade students are un-

derprepared for postsecondary education AND enroll at the two-year level, a rate 10

percentage points higher than that for White students.

Degree Completion. Among non-qualified students, approximately one-third of Latino

and White students who initially enrolled at a four-year institution managed to secure a

four-year degree (32.3 percent Latino vs. 36.2 percent White). Thus, those underprepared

students who entered at the four-year level had about the same chance of success at the

BA level. At the two-year level, White students were twice as successful or twice as

likely as Latino students (9.5 vs 4.7 percent) to secure a bachelor’s degree. Only 1-in-20

two-year Latino students successfully completed a four-year program.


Exhibit 2. Pathways to baccalaureate degree attainment for 1000 NELS 8th grade cohort1 10

00 8th

grad

ers

Not Qualified557 (55.7)

50 (12.8)

CollegeQualifications

First PSE attended Probability of Securing 4-Year Degree

9.5

36.2

4.7

32.3

0 10 20 30 40

2-Year

4-Year

Not Qualified390 (39.0)

52 (9.3)4-Year

143 (36.7)245 (44.0)2-Year

14 (3.6)20 (3.6)Other

183 (46.9)240 (43.1)NONE

Latino White

Minimally Qualified166 (16.6)

48 (35.3)50 (30.1)4-Year

65 (47.8)99 (59.6)2-Year

2 (1.5)2 (1.2)Other

21 (15.4)15 (9.0)NONE

Latino White

Qualified277 (27.7)

346 (73.0)

Qualified474 (47.4)

172 (62.1)4-Year

110 (23.2)90 (32.5)2-Year

1 (0.2)6 (2.2)Other

17 (3.6)9 (3.2)NONE

Latino White

Minimally Qualified136 (13.6)

15.8

52.0

6.7

55.5

0 20 40 60

2-Year

4-Year

31.4

79.4

31.4

56.8

0 20 40 60 80 100

2-Year

4-Year

Latino

White

NOTE: Numbers in parentheses indicate percentage of larger or parent group.Source: US Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS: 88/2000, 2003-402).

Minimally-Qualified Students

The second layer of data in Exhibit 2 depicts students deemed “minimally qualified” for

college. As illustrated, a much smaller group of Latinos and White students wound up

in this category, suggesting a reverse bell curve where most students were categorized

as either “non-qualified” or “qualified.”

Postsecondary participation. Again, our analysis found that Latino youth were under-

represented at the four-year level and overrepresented at the two-year level within the

1 The NELS cohort identified and used for this analysis differs slightly from the cohort used in analysis later in this publication. This analysis is limited to students who started in the eighth grade but also had the necessary information in order to categorize them in terms of their college qualifications. This requires us to remove a small percentage of students from the original cohort.


classification of minimally-qualified for college. But within the group of minimally-

qualified students, Latinos were more likely to participate in postsecondary education

than were White students. Specifically, 91 percent of minimally-qualified Latino stu-

dents went on to some form of postsecondary education, compared to 85 percent of

similarly-qualified White students.

Four-year enrollment. As with non-qualified students, the same number of minimally-

qualified Latino and White students within the 1000 student universe enrolled in a four-

year institution (50 vs. 48), but a higher percentage of minimally-qualified White stu-

dents wound up in a four-year institution (35 percent) than Latino students (30 percent).

Two-year enrollment. At the two-year level, the trend in enrollment shifts. Ninety-nine

minimally-qualified Latino students enrolled at a two-year institution (59.6 percent)

compared to 65 White students (47.8 percent).

Degree Completion. With respect to the probability of securing a four-year degree,

minimally-qualified Latinos were slightly more likely than White students to earn a BA

(55.5 vs. 52.0 percent). At the two-year level, White students completed at twice the rate

of Latinos (15.8 to 6.7 percent).

College-Qualified Students

The third and final layer of our analysis focuses on students considered “qualified” for

college. The first and best news is that almost all college-qualified students, Latino or

White, went on to some form of postsecondary education within eight years of sched-

uled high school graduation.

Postsecondary participation. Only 9 of 277 qualified Latino students and 17 of 474

qualified White students did not make it to the postsecondary world. In any analysis,

those data suggest almost full access to PSE. However, those same two numbers—277

and 474—place an exclamation mark on the underrepresentation of Latino students in


the college-qualified pool of students. For every 10 White students who are college

qualified, only 7 Latino students are similarly qualified.

Four-year enrolment. At the four-year level, 346 college-qualified White students made

it to the four-year track, representing 73 percent of all college-qualified White students.

Comparatively, only 172 Latino students—or 62 percent of all college-qualified Latino

youth—enrolled in a four-year institution. Alternatively stated, almost 40 percent of La-

tino students considered worthy academically for four-year studies failed to enroll at a

four-year institution. In a broader picture, one-third of all White students were both col-

lege qualified and enrolled at a four-year school. In the Latino world, only 17 percent of

eighth graders—half the rate of White students—were both qualified and four-year en-

rolled.

Two-year enrolment. The two-year level of college-qualified students is the only sector

where we see White students outnumber Latino students (110 vs. 90). However, the per-

centage of college-qualified Latino students entering two-year schools, 32.5 percent, is

still higher than the 23.2 percent of qualified White students entering two-year institu-

tions.

Degree Completion. A disturbing finding comes out of the probability of securing a

four-year degree data. Whereas college-qualified White students have a 79.4 percent

probably of completing a BA, the Latino success rate is only 56.8 percent—20 percent

lower than their White peers. Important to remember is that this is indicative of “college

qualified” students, and of this group 43 percent of prepared Latino students aren’t

completing their BA to only 20 percent of White students. At the two-year level, Latinos

and Whites fared identically: 31.4 percent of both groups who initially attended a two-

year college secured a certificate or associates degree.


Earning a Bachelor’s Degree From our universe of 1000 students, more than twice as many White students who ini-

tially enrolled at a four-year institution earned a BA compared to Latino students. Ac-

cording to our analysis, 318 White students from the original eighth-grade universe of

1000 students initially enrolled at a four-year institution and graduated with a bachelor’s

degree (see Exhibit 3). Within the Latino cohort, only 142, or 14.2 percent, traveled and

completed the same path.

Those with greater academic qualifications were much more likely to enroll at a four-

year institution and complete a BA. Interesting enough, 86 percent of all degrees con-

ferred to White students enrolled at four-year institutions went to students considered

“qualified.” Latinos, however, were more diverse in their qualifications. Only 69 percent

of Latino BAs came from those “qualified” for college. Twenty percent came from

minimally-qualified students and 12 percent from non-qualified students.

Exhibit 3. Average number of earned bachelor’s degrees by NELS students from a universe of 1000 who initially enrolled at a four-year institution by 2000, by college qualification index

Qualification Index Latino White All Students Not Qualified 17 18 52 Minimally Qualified 28 25 50 Qualified 98 275 172 Total 142 318 274

Of course, students who begin at institutions other than the four-year type also have op-

portunity to earn a BA over time. Considering that a large percentage and number of

Latino students enter initially at the two-year level, it is within reason that some of those

students eventually transfer to a four-year institution and ultimately receive a bachelor’s

degree. The result is that the number of BAs conferred is moderately higher than our

previous assertion. However, the probability rate is reduced because we now consider

all students, not just those who started at a four-year institution.


Exhibit 4 illustrates the BA probability rate of all eighth-grade students, regardless of if

or where they initially enrolled at the postsecondary level. Over all, 37.5 percent of

eighth-grade White students earned a BA within 8 years of scheduled high school

graduation, compared to 18.6 percent of Latino youth. From a 1000 person cohort, we

would expect 375 White students and only 186 Latino students to earn a BA—again a

ratio of 2:1.

Of qualified students, 65 percent of White eighth-grade students and 45.5 percent of La-

tino students earn a BA. At the lowest end of the index, 8.1 percent of White students

and 5.0 percent of Latino students earn a BA. Thus, in every category and in every

analysis, Latino students are underrepresented.

Exhibit 4. Percentage of NELS 88 eighth grade students who earned a bachelor's degree by 2000, by college qualification index

5.0

20.7

45.5

18.6

8.1

26.1

65.0

37.5

0 25 50 75

Not Qualified

Minimally Qualified

Qualified

All

White

Latino

NOTE: These figures do not match up exactly with those on Tables 1 or Exhibit 2 due to the slight differences in statistical cohorts required to calculate college qualification index.SOURCE: US Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS: 88/2000, 2003-402).


Also interesting is how students who initially enroll at a community college fair in the

educational pipeline. As featured in Exhibit 5, students who are qualified for college-

level work, regardless of race/ethnicity, are equally likely to transfer and earn a bache-

lor’s degree within eight-years of scheduled high school graduation. In other terms, one

quarter of all entering college-qualified students at the community college level end up

with a bachelor’s degree. The variations between White and Latino students only rise at

the minimally and not qualified levels. For instance, 15.9 percent of minimally-qualified

White students end up with a bachelor’s degree, compared to only 6.8 percent of Latino

students. And 9.5 percent of White students who are not qualified for college end up

with a bachelor’s degree, compared to 4.7 percent of similar Latino students.

Exhibit 5. Percentage of NELS Latino and White two-year students (initial enrolment) who earned a bachelor's degree by 2000, by college qualification index

4.7

6.8

31.4

9.5

15.9

31.4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

not qualified

minimallyqualified

qualified

not qualified

minimallyqualified

qualified

Latin

oW

hite

Percent


Thus, the differences between White and Latino students with regard to transfer and BA

degree completion are not staggering. In fact, this statistical relationship also transfers to

two-year certificates and associates degrees (Exhibit 6), suggesting that, given appropri-


ate opportunity to learn at the pre-college levels, Latinos and White students who enroll

at the community college have similar opportunities to reach their academic goals. Chal-

lenges exist more so for Latino students who are not appropriately prepared compared

to White students.

Exhibit 6. Percentage of NELS Latino and White two-year students (initial enrolment) who earned an academic cre-dential by 2000, by degree type and college qualification index

None Certificate Associate's Bachelor's Graduate Studies Total

not qualified 81.8 5.9 7.6 2.1 2.6 100.0 minimally qualified 82.1 3.5 7.8 3.7 3.1 100.0 Latino Qualified 42.6 6.6 19.4 24.5 6.9 100.0

not qualified 71.3 7.4 11.8 7.3 2.2 100.0 minimally qualified 58.5 8.8 16.9 12.3 3.6 100.0 White Qualified 41.5 6.9 20.1 24.6 6.8 100.0

Background Characteristics

This section provides an overview of the dataset by a variety of background characteris-

tics of Latino students in comparison to other groups.

Gender. On average, the NELS cohort was split evenly between males and females.

However, the Latino cohort was not as balanced by gender, with Males representing

46.6 of the cohort. This has some implications for educational pathways, since males are

less likely to complete high school, less likely to enroll in postsecondary education, and

less likely to persist through graduation.

Family Income. Latinos and African Americans were equally the least affluent members

of the 8th grade cohort. Over half of Latinos had family incomes of less than $25,000 a

year, while only 7.5 percent had a family income of $75,000 or higher. This compares to

the average NELS population where 29 percent of students came from families below

$25,000 a year in income and 16.7 percent were above. White students were more afflu-


ent. Only 23 percent of white students came from families below the $25,000 level, and

18.3 percent were $75,000 and above.

Socially-economically, income matters because it relates to a family’s ability to choose

their living characteristics. Families with higher incomes have greater opportunity to

move into neighborhoods with higher average home prices, thus schools that have often

have better funding, typically resulting in a better learning environment (McDonough,

1997).

Exhibit 7. Family Income of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort

29.3

23

53.7

52.6

28.7

54

58.3

38.8

40.1

44.1

16.7

18.3

7.5

7.3

27.2

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

Less than $25,000 $25,000 - $74,999 $75,000 or more

US Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS: 88/2000, 2003-402).

Educational Legacy. One of the key precursors to aspiring and enrolling in postsecond-

ary education for youth is the educational legacy they are left with by their parents. Stu-

dents whose parents went to college or university were generally much more likely to

participate in postsecondary studies themselves (Cabrera & La Nasa, 2000). All tolled, 72

percent of NELS youth had at least one parent with postsecondary experience, 30 per-

cent of whom had achieved at least a bachelor’s degree. Conversely, only half (49.4 per-


cent) of Latino youth had a parent who had gone to college, and only 14.1 percent had

received a bachelor’s degree or higher—half the rate of the national average. In compari-

son, 33.7 percent of White students and 48.3 percent of Asian parents held at least a BA.

Exhibit 8. Highest parental education of 1988 8th grade cohort

9.4

5.8

33.1

13.9

7.1

19

19.4

17.4

20.2

12.7

41.3

41.1

35.3

50.8

31.9

16

17.7

7.8

8.6

24.5

14.2

16.0

6.3

6.4

23.8

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

No HS diploma or GED HS diploma or equivalent

Some college Bachelor’s degree

Graduate studies


Preparation for Postsecondary Studies

Central to the eventual enrolment and completion of postsecondary education is the

preparation of students for further education (Adelman, 1999). In our analysis, we were

able to look at aspirations of students for education beyond high school back in the 8th

grade, and then the actual course-taking patterns and academic preparedness during the

high school years.


Aspirations and plans The first step on the ladder toward postsecondary education is an aspiration toward that

goal. On the whole, it’s good news that most 8th grade students expected to participate in

some form of postsecondary education after they graduate from high school. In fact,

four-of-five students (80 percent), on average, aspired to that level, and two thirds as-

pired to at least a bachelor’s degree.

The overall picture is less positive for Latino students. Seventy-three percent of Latinos

aspired to postsecondary education, but only 55 percent—a full 20 percent lower than

the national average—aspired to a BA. The aspirations of Latino students in the US were

the lowest of any other group in our analysis, thus a cause for concern to policymakers.

Generally speaking, students who do not aspire to postsecondary education self-select

themselves out of the pipeline. Thus, 27 percent of Latino students—over one quarter—

are gone by the 8th grade.

Exhibit 9. Highest degree planned by students in the 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort in 8th grade

20.2

20.2

26.9

17.1

11.5

13.2

11.6

18

18.6

15.7

43.5

45.3

35.4

41

38.8

23.1

23

19.8

23.2

34

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

Less than college Some college Bachelor’s Advanced degree



Academic Preparation Aspirations are important to postsecondary access and success, but it only matters if

students put those aspirations into motion. We looked at two variables to characterize

academic preparation for postsecondary education. In the last section, we took an in-

depth look at the college qualifications of students. We start with a broad look at these

qualifications across all subgroups.

As Exhibit 10 illustrates, a high proportion of Latino and African American students

were classified as not qualified for postsecondary education. For Latinos and African

Americans, 59 percent and 63 percent respectively were characterized as such, compared

to 44 percent of the total NELS cohort and 41 percent for White students. Again, a gap of

approximately 20 percent in terms of those who are at least minimally qualified for post-

secondary education between students of color2 and White or Asian students.

Looking at the other end of the qualification spectrum, approximately twice the percent

of White students were qualified for higher education than Latinos and African Ameri-

cans. Only 1 in 4 Latino students were qualified for the postsecondary world, compared

to 46 percent of White students.

2 Students of color in this report refers to Latino and African Americans, and not Asian Americans. Native Americans were not included in this analysis.


Exhibit 10. Distribution of 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort by level of academic preparedness

44.3

40.5

58.6

63.3

31.9

13.9

13.6

16.1

14.6

12.3

41.8

46

25.3

22.1

55.8

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

Not qualified Minimally qualified Qualified


Our second variable of interest is the highest level of mathematics completed during

high school. A number of studies have found mathematics to be the primary gatekeeper

to postsecondary entry (Pelavin and Kane, 1990; Adelman, 1999), and those students

who stay at the rudimentary levels of mathematics are far less likely to participate and

excel at the postsecondary level. Our analysis buttresses those findings.

Exhibit 11 illustrates the course-taking patterns of NELS high school students in mathe-

matics. For simplicity, we only show the percentages for Latinos versus all students3. As

depicted, low-level courses are found at the top of the exhibit and higher-level courses

toward the bottom.

As illustrated, Latinos are much more likely to complete their public education with

lower-math level courses than other students. In fact, over 58 percent of Latino students

finished with standard geometry and never proceeded any further along the mathemat-

3 Further details may be found in the tables in the appendices of this report.


ics track. Comparatively, 44 percent of all students and 41 percent of White students dis-

continued their mathematics studies at this level. As the progression toward more chal-

lenging mathematics coursework continues, the percent of Latinos trailed off considera-

bly. The percent differences aren’t necessarily huge by any sense, but they make a real

difference in the number of students ready for higher-level learning. For instance, Lati-

nos completed calculus at half the rate of all students.

What does this mean? For one, lower levels in mathematics suggest limited admission to

most state universities and no admission to top-tier institutions. Second, it suggests lim-

ited access to high tech industrial careers that pay more than a living wage. And third,

those with lower levels of mathematics are also less likely to even complete their high

school career, let alone a postsecondary experience.

Exhibit 11. Highest level of mathematics completed during high school by 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort

9.2

10.0

10.5

26.2

13.9

19.9

10.3

4.3

7.1

8.2

22.2

18.7

25.1

14.4

0 10 20 30

Calculus

Pre-calculus

Trigonometry

Algebra II

Geometry

Algebra I

Less than AlgebraI

Percent

Latinos

All



High School Completion On average, 92.3 percent of the NELS 8th grade cohort received a high school diploma,

GED, or equivalent credential by 2000. Comparatively, 86.4 percent of Latinos received

their high school credential, the lowest of the groups observed. Thus, the issues covered

prior to this stage of our analysis are already having an impact on the educational pipe-

line of Latino students.

Almost 10 percent of Latino students received a GED rather than the traditional di-

ploma, about 2 percentage points higher than the national average. This is considerably

below the 14 percent GED rate for African Americans, but significantly higher than the

6.8 percent of White students who earn a GED.

Exhibit 12. Percent of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort that received a high school diploma or GED

92.3

93.2

86.4

90.6

96.5

7.9

6.8

9.8

14.0

1.3

0 25 50 75 100

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

HS Diploma or GED GED or other high school equivalency



The Postsecondary Experience

Our analysis now progresses to the postsecondary level. In this section, we discuss who

went to postsecondary education and where, who completed, along with various charac-

teristics of enrolment and postsecondary participation.

Participation at the Postsecondary Level For the eighth-grade NELS cohort, 72.6 percent of students went on to some form of

postsecondary study by 2000, or eight years past scheduled high school graduation.

Sixty-six percent of Latino students enrolled and participated in postsecondary educa-

tion, compared to 74.5 percent of White students and 90 percent of Asian Americans.

African American students faired slightly worse than Latinos at 63.2 percent.

Of the original cohort, 37.3 percent made their initial enrolment at the four-year level. By

comparison, only 22.1 percent of Latinos—almost half the four-year participation rate of

Whites (40.8), enrolled at the four-year level. A much higher percent of the original co-

hort of Latinos, 40 percent, participates at two-year schools compared to other student

groups (32.3 percent on average).


Exhibit 13. Percent distribution of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort by postsecondary participation

27.4

25.5

34.4

36.8

10.0

3.1

2.2

3.4

7.9

32.3

31.5

40.0

29.4

35.9

37.3

40.8

22.1

25.8

51.62.5

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

No attendance Less than a 2-year institution 2-year 4-year


Of the group of students who matriculated to postsecondary education, approximately

half first enrolled at a four-year institution (51.3 percent). Asians enrolled at a rate of 57.3

percent and White students at 54.8 percent. Only one-of-three Latino students, in com-

parison, made their first postsecondary enrollment at the four-year level. Forty-one per-

cent of African American students enrolled in a four-year institution.

As illustrated previously, Latinos are much more likely to enroll at the two-year level

than other students. Of those Latino students who went on to postsecondary education,

almost two-of-three, or 61.1 percent, enrolled in a two-year institution. This is much

higher than the cohort average of 44.4 percent and higher than that of African American

students (46.6 percent).


Exhibit 14. Percentage distribution of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort postsecondary participators by type of institution participated

12.5

44.4

42.3

61.1

46.6

51.3

54.8

33.7

40.9

57.32.8

5.2

4.3

3.0

39.9

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

Less than a 2-year institution 2-year 4-year


Institutional Sector

Most postsecondary students participated in a publicly-funded and operated institution.

On average, 78.2 percent of students enrolled at this type of institution, with 19 percent

enrolling at private, not-for-profit institutions. Latinos tended to enroll at public institu-

tions at higher rates (83.2 percent) than other student groups and the least likely to en-

roll at private, not-for-profit institutions.


Exhibit 15. Percentage distribution of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort by type of institution participated

19.0

19.7

13.7

15.7

23.9

78.2

77.4

83.2

80.5

75.1

0 25 50 75 100

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

Private, non-for-profit Public


Institutional selectivity

Selectivity of postsecondary institution is both a proxy for academic preparation and for

future educational and career opportunities. Institutions were rated as highly selective,

selective, non-selective, and open-door institutions4. A small proportion of students at-

tend institutions that are not ratable (approx. 2.9 percent).

A higher percentage of Asian Americans attended selective or highly selective institu-

tions than other students. In total, 18.4 percent of Asian Americans attended selective

institutions and 11.7 percent attended highly selective institutions. These were far higher

percentages than on average, where students attended at rates of 11.3 and 3.0 percent

respectively. Approximately 15 percent of White students attended a selective or highly

selective institution.

4 Assignment of institutions to each band was based first on the selectivity cells used in the Cooperative Institutional Research Project (CIRP) for 1992. The NELS open door category includes community col-leges and area vocational technical institutes.


Latino students were much less likely to attend selective institutions than other students.

In fact, only 7.7 percent of Latino students attending a postsecondary institution at-

tended either a selective or highly selective institution. Only 1.6 percent attended a

highly selective institution. Conversely, Latinos were more inclined to attend “open-

door” institutions (not depicted in Exhibit 16). Fifty-five percent of Latino students at-

tended the open-door style of institution, compared to an average of 42.5 percent.

Exhibit 16. Selectivity of postsecondary institution attended by 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort who went on to postsec-ondary education

3.0

2.8

1.6

2.5

11.7

11.3

12.2

6.1

6.7

18.4

0 10 20 30

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

Highly selective Selective


Institutional Cost

Latinos were also more likely to attend institutions with a lower average tuition charges

than other students. On average, students from our 8th grade cohort attend postsecond-

ary institution that cost $5,646 on average. Comparatively, Latino students attend insti-

tutions that cost $3,978, the lowest average cost of any student group. Asians attended

the highest-cost institutions ($6,883) followed by White students ($5,980).


Exhibit 17. Average tuition fees for 1st postsecondary institution attended by 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort

$5,646

$5,980

$3,978

$4,204

$6,883

$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Dollars


Delayed postsecondary entry

Students who delay entry into postsecondary education do not succeed as well as those

who go directly from high school to postsecondary education (Adelman, 1999). Based on

our analysis of the NELS data, approximately one-of-five students (19.3 percent) delayed

entry into postsecondary education after high school. A slightly larger percentage of La-

tino students, 23.3 percent, delayed entry.

Of those that delayed entry into postsecondary education, approximately 50 percent de-

layed more than 20 months, while the remainder delayed between 8-20 months. A

slightly higher percentage of Latinos delayed for a longer period (13 percent of total PSE

cohort; 56 percent of delayed cohort). Overall, the differences in delay by subgroup are

not very significant, with the exception of Asian Americans, who delayed the least over-

all (13.8 percent) and were more likely to delay for shorter periods.


Exhibit 18. Number of months between high school graduation and entry into postsecondary for 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort

9.2

8.4

10.3

14.2

8.7

10.1

9.4

13.0

15.0

5.1

0 10 20 30

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

8-20 months More than 20 months


Attendance Patterns Latino students were much more likely to attend postsecondary education on a part-

time basis than other students. Of the total cohort that went on to postsecondary educa-

tion, 38.6 percent of students attended on a part-time basis. However, over half (51.8

percent) of Latino students who enrolled in postsecondary education attended part-time.

Most other student groups hovered around the cohort average, but Latinos attended on

a part-time basis in much greater fashion than their peers.


Exhibit 19. Percent of postsecondary students from the 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort who attended postsecondary institutions on a part-time basis.

38.6

37.1

51.8

37.0

38.5

0 20 40 60

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent


Institutions attended. Approximately 30 percent of students attended more than one

postsecondary institution, and a slightly higher percentage (32.4 percent) changed ma-

jors. There were no significant differences by race/ethnic group.

Institutional Transfers. While almost one-third of our cohort transferred from a two-

year to a four-year institution during their postsecondary experience, only 18.9 percent

of Latinos did the same. Comparatively, 37 percent of Asian students transferred from

two- to four-year institutions.

Continuous enrolment. Another predictor of academic success and completion is con-

tinuous enrolment (Adelman, 1999). A student is considered continuously enrolled if

they attend successive semesters and do not stop-out of studies for more than four

months at one time. Our analysis found that Latinos are much less likely to maintain

continuous enrolment than other students. On average, 43 percent of Latinos maintained

continuous enrolment in postsecondary education, compared to 62.9 percent of the en-


tire cohort and 67 percent of White students. With regard to stopouts, Latino students

were more likely to take time off from their studies than other students (40.2 percent

compared to cohort average of 27.7 percent).

Exhibit 20. Percent of postsecondary students from the 1988 NELS 8th grader cohort who maintained continuous enrollment while in PSE

62.9

67.0

43.0

49.8

64.4

0 20 40 60 80

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent


Postsecondary Completion The most decisive trend differential between Latino and White students was that of

postsecondary completion. Of only those eighth-grade students that went on to postsec-

ondary studies, 43.4 percent received a bachelor’s degree and 12.6 percent received a

certificate or associate’s degree. Forty-four percent of those who went on to postsecond-

ary education did not receive a degree by 2000. Among Latinos, only 23.2 percent re-

ceived a bachelor’s degree and 12.8 percent a certificate or associate’s degree. Almost

two thirds (64 percent) of Latinos who entered postsecondary education did not receive

a degree by 2000. Comparatively, White students faired much better. Forty-seven per-


cent of White students earned a BA, 12.7 percent a certificate or associate’s degree, and

39.9 percent did not complete a degree of any type.

Exhibit 21. Highest postsecondary degree attained by 2000 (eight years after scheduled high school graduation) by 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort

44.0

39.9

64.0

57.8

39.4

12.6

12.7

12.8

12.7

10.0

43.4

47.3

23.2

29.5

50.7

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Total

White

Latino

Black

Asian/PacificIslander

Percent

None Certificate or Associate's degree Bachelor's or higher


Time to degree

Research has suggested that low-income and students of color do not complete their

postsecondary certificates or degrees within the standard four-year period (Adelman,

1999; Hafner et al., 1990). Our analysis finds that most students do not complete within

four-years, and that students of color, with the exception of Asian Americans, fair worse

than White students.

Overall, 41.6 percent of PSE students who completed a BA did so within four years, with

an additional 33.7 percent completing within five years. Therefore, three quarters (75.3

percent) of all students who completed a BA did so within a five-year period. Latino

students completed at more relaxed rates. Only 23 percent of Latino students who com-

pleted a BA did so within four-years. In total, 57.5 percent completed within five years.

This is the lowest rate of progress by race/ethnic group in our analysis. On the flip side,


42.5 percent of Latino students completed their BA beyond the five-year mark, com-

pared to one quarter (24.7 percent) of the entire cohort. This suggests that Latino stu-

dents, for a variety of reasons, take extra time to degree—but they do get the degree.

Exhibit 22. Time to bachelor degree completion for 1988 8th grade cohort

41.6

43.9

23

24.3

44.8

33.7

33.6

34.5

41.0

25.5

24.7

22.5

42.4

34.7

29.7

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

Within 4 years Up to 5 years More than 5 years


Risk Factors During the first analysis of NELS data in 1990, Hafner, Ingels, Schneider, and Stevenson

(1990) identified a series of six risk factors to postsecondary participation which in-

cluded:

Single parent family Income less than $15,000 Home alone more than 3 hours a day Parents have no high school diploma Has a sibling who dropped out Limited-English-proficient

In addition to these risk factors, the following were identified and used in our analysis:


Held back in school Changed high school more than twice Having a C or lower GPA in high school Having children during high school years

Exhibit 23 compares individual risk factors for Latino youth with the entire cohort. With

the exception of two factors, a higher percentage of Latino students consistently were at-

risk when compared with the total cohort, averaging 7 percentage points above the co-

hort average in each risk category. Comparatively, the percentage of White students

within each risk factor was below the cohort average in each factor, running an average

of 2.6 percentage points below the national average in most categories.

Risk areas where Latinos were overrepresented include parents without a high school

degree, low-family income, and sibling dropouts. Slightly less than one-third (29.5 per-

cent) of Latino students had parents without a high school degree, 20 percentage points

above the cohort average. Over one-third (34.5 percent) were from extremely low-

income backgrounds, 16 percentage points higher than the cohort average of 18.3 per-

cent. And 63.3 percent of Latino youth had siblings who had dropped out from high

school, 10 percentage points higher than the cohort average of 53.2 percent. Addition-

ally, 10 percent of Latino students were limited English proficiency, 8 percentage points

higher than the cohort average.

In other risk areas, including being held back in school, changing schools, earning a C or

less GPA, and bearing children while still in high school, Latino youth were slightly

overrepresented (between 3.6 and 5.6 percent) compared to the cohort average.


Exhibit 23. At-risk factors for Latino students versus all students of 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort

2.3

5.4

15.1

17.9

9.3

18.3

31.2

35.7

53.2

10.1

11.0

13.2

16.9

19.9

29.5

34.5

36.5

39.9

63.3

16.3

0 25 50 75

Limited Englishproficiency

Having childrenduring HS years

Being home alone formore than 3hrs

Raised by singleparent

Held back in school

Parents with no Highschool degree

Family income lessthan $15,000

Changed HS morethan twice

Having a C or lessGPA

Having siblings whodropout from HS

Percent

Latinos

All


As evidenced in Exhibit 24, Latinos have, on average, more risk factors than any other

student group except African Americans. Almost half of all Latino students, or 49.2 per-

cent, have three or more risk factors, compared to a cohort average of 31.6 and a White

average of 25.4 percent. Over three quarters of Latino youth have two or more factors

(compared to 54.6 percent on average) and higher than the rate for African Americans

(72.8 percent). Nineteen of 20 (94.5 percent) Latino students have at least one risk factor

(compared to 84.3 percent on average).


Exhibit 24. Number of risk factors for 1988 NELS 8th grade cohort

15.7

19.3

5.4

3.8

16.8

29.7

32.8

16.8

23.5

28.1

23

22.5

28.5

19.6

28.6

31.6

25.4

49.2

53.2

26.5

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

All

Whites

Latinos

African Americans

Asian Americans

Percent

None One Two Three or more


Summary and Conclusion

At the beginning of this report, we introduced readers to Juan and Susan, two high

school students from Texas with a sight on their future. Through our analyses of the

most recent NELS dataset, we conclude that Juan’s pathway to and through postsecond-

ary education is far more challenging than Susan’s.

Page by page, we have introduced data into the public arena that clearly illustrates

where the challenges lay for Latino students versus students from other race/ethnic

backgrounds, particularly White students. Taken together and in sum, the evidence is

strong and unambiguous: Latino students are clearly at a deficit in terms of aspirations,

preparation, access, and completion of postsecondary education.

To conclude, we summarize the research issues raised through this report. Our analysis

found that during the high school years, Latino students were more likely to:


have been held back in school have changed HS more than twice earn a C or less in high school take lower forms of mathematics in high school leave high school before graduation earn a GED

These are partially the result of other background characteristics which were present for

Latino students. For instance, Latino students were more likely to:

be from a low-income family have a sibling who dropped out of school be limited in their English proficiency have a parent who did not graduate from high school have children during high school have a parent without any postsecondary experience

As expected, the weight of these forces compounds to further reduce opportunities for

Latino youth, such that they were:

Less likely to: More likely to:

aspire to postsecondary education and to a Bachelor’s or advanced degree

enroll in postsecondary education be academically qualified for postsec-

ondary education enroll at a selective postsecondary in-

stitution maintain continuous enrolment

through to degree complete a postsecondary degree earn a degree within four years

enroll in a two-year rather than a four-year institution

delay entry into postsecondary educa-tion and delay for longer periods

attend part-time attend more than one postsecondary

institution enroll at a publicly-funded postsec-

ondary institution attend lower-cost institutions

It isn’t until we see this inventory of challenges facing Latino students that one can truly

comprehend the scale of this issue. At almost every level, Latino youth face an upward


struggle. The impact of these forces is to suppress the educational opportunity for these

youth and lead them to a future that requires more effort to keep on current standing

with other students, much less than trying to climb up the ladder of opportunity.

The US is more racially and ethnically diverse than at any time in its history, and the

near future promises a continuation of this trend. By 2050, Latinos will be the majority

ethnic group in America. For that reason and others, it is imperative that public policy

focus more rigorously on the academic pipeline issues for Latino youth, understanding

completely that dealing with these issues has the potential to raise the bar for all chil-

dren.

This can only be done through broad social programming. Turning a few screws on cur-

rent policy and programs will result in limited incremental reforms, which in turn will

result in little if any progress in attainment for at-risk youth. This is an important point.

If our society is only interested in playing at the margins of social engineering, we must

reasonably expect marginal outcomes. If a true interest is in place or can be set in place

to remedy past and current inequities, only then can we achieve a broader set of out-

comes based on research and knowledge. It will require a comprehensive and radical

reform effort of the education of youth from low-income populations along the entire K-

16 system to realize genuine change.

Unfortunately, given the recent budget crisis of our federal and state governments, in-

vestment in education at the elementary, secondary, and postsecondary levels is ex-

pected to stay dormant for the next several years. The excesses of the 1990s provided

ample opportunity and resources to deal with many of these issues, but those opportu-

nities have been squandered through imprudent tax cuts and other policy decisions.

Hopefully policymakers will look at the data in this report and realize that a renewed

commitment to the education of all students is the only answer to our dilemma. Given

that commitment and the commitment of educators, parents, and citizens, then perhaps


students like Juan can have the choice to mark out their own future, not have society

mark it out for them.

Appendix A. Data Tables


Table 1. Selected socio-economic and demographic characteristics of the 1988 8th graders cohort across ethnicity in percentages

Factor All Whites Latinos African

Americans Asian

Americans Gender

Male 49.9 49.7 46.6 54.2 48.8 Female 50.1 50.3 53.4 45.8 51.2 Highest parental education No HS diploma or GED 9.4 5.8 33.1 13.9 7.1 HS diploma or equivalent 19 19.4 17.4 20.2 12.7 Some college 41.3 41.1 35.3 50.8 31.9 Bachelor’s degree 16 17.7 7.8 8.6 24.5 Graduate studies 14.2 16 6.3 6.4 23.8 Family income Less than $25,000 29.3 23 53.7 52.6 28.7 $25,000 - $74,999 54 58.3 38.8 40.1 44.1 $75,000 or more 16.7 18.3 7.5 7.3 27.2 Highest degree planned in the 8th grade Less than college 20.2 20.2 26.9 17.1 11.5 Some college 13.2 11.6 18 18.6 15.7 Bachelor’s 43.5 45.3 35.4 41 38.8 Advanced degree 23.1 23 19.8 23.2 34 Preparation for college Not qualified 44.3 40.5 58.6 63.3 31.9 Minimally qualified 13.9 13.6 16.1 14.6 12.3 Qualified 41.8 46 25.3 22.1 55.8 Highest mathematics in High School Calculus 9.2 9.9 4.3 3.8 23 Pre-calculus 10 10.8 7.1 4.9 15.3 Trigonometry 10.5 11 8.2 8.8 11 Algebra II 26.2 27.7 22.2 20.6 21.9 Geometry 13.9 13.7 18.7 13.2 9.6 Algebra I 19.9 18 25.1 31 14.7 Less than Algebra I 10.3 9 14.4 17.8 4.5 Source: US Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS: 88/2000, 2003-402).


Table 1 (continued). Selected socio-economic and demographic characteristics of the 1988 8th graders cohort across ethnicity in percentages


Americans Asian

Americans High School completion by 2000 HS Diploma or GED 92.3 93.2 86.4 90.6 96.5 No HS credential 7.6 6.7 13.3 9 3.4 Standard HS diploma 84.4 86.4 76.6 76.5 95.2 GED/other HS equivalency 7.9 6.8 9.8 14 1.3 Certificate of attendance 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.1 First type of PSE institution attended No attendance 27.4 25.5 34.4 36.8 10 Less than a 2-year institution 3.1 2.2 3.4 7.9 2.5 2-year 32.3 31.5 40.0 29.4 35.9 4-year 37.3 40.8 22.1 25.8 51.6 Highest PSE degree attained by 2000 1 None 58.5 54.7 76.4 71.5 45.1 Certificate/License 3.7 3.6 3.3 4.3 4.6 Associate degree 5.7 6.1 5 4.2 4.6 Bachelor’s degree 22.2 24.5 10.6 15 30.2 Graduate studies 10 11.2 4.6 4.9 15.5 Source: US Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS: 88/2000, 2003-402). 1 Highest PSE attained was ascertained from college transcripts (HDEG).


Table 1 (continued). Selected socio-economic and demographic characteristics of the 1988 8th graders cohort across ethnicity in percentages


Americans Asian

Americans 1. Raised by single parent 17.9 13.9 16.9 44.3 6 2. Parents with no High school degree 9.3 6.1 29.5 11.2 6.7 3. Having siblings who dropout from HS 53.2 51.5 63.3 54.4 53.6 4. Being home alone for more than 3hrs 15.1 12.7 13.2 29.4 16.5 5. Limited English proficiency 2.3 0.8 10.1 2.2 8.7 6. Family income less than $15,000 18.3 12.4 34.5 39.2 12.1 7. Held back in school 16.3 14.4 19.9 26.7 15.4 8. Changed HS more than twice 31.2 29 36.5 36.7 46.2 9. Having a C or less GPA 35.7 33.6 39.9 48.8 25.1 10. Having children during HS years 5.4 4 11 9.5 1.1 Number of at-risk factors None 15.7 19.3 5.4 3.8 16.8 One 29.7 32.8 16.8 23.5 28.1 Two 23 22.5 28.5 19.6 28.6 Three or more 31.6 25.4 49.2 53.2 26.5 First type of postsecondary institution attended 1 No attendance Less than a 2-year institution 27.4 25.5 34.4 36.8 10 2-year 3.1 2.2 3.4 7.9 2.5 4-year 32.3 31.5 40 29.4 35.9 37.3 40.8 22.1 25.8 51.6 Source: US Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS: 88/2000, 2003-402). 1Based on true first institution attended as verified by college transcripts (TRUFIRST).


Table 2. Various postsecondary outcomes and variables for those members 1988 8th graders who became postsecondary participants.

PSE Attendance All Whites LatinosAfrican

Americans Asian

Americans Months between HS completion & PSE attendance 0-7 months 80.7 82.3 76.7 70.7 86.1 8-20 months 9.2 8.4 10.3 14.2 8.7 More than 20 months 10.1 9.4 13 15 5.1 Selectivity of 1st PSE attended Highly selective 3 2.8 1.6 2.5 11.7 Selective 11.3 12.2 6.1 6.7 18.4 Non-selective 40.3 41.7 33.4 38.7 35.1 Open door 42.5 40.6 55.2 48.9 33.2 Not ratable 2.9 2.8 3.8 3.2 1.8 Sector of 1st PSE attended 1 Private, for-profit 2.9 2.8 3.1 3.8 1 Private, non-for-profit 19 19.7 13.7 15.7 23.9 Public 78.2 77.4 83.2 80.5 75.1 Average tuition for 1st PSE attended 1 $5,646 $5,980 $3,978 $4,204 $6,883 Highest level of PSE attained None 44.0 39.9 64.0 57.8 39.4 Certificate 4.9 4.7 5.1 6.4 4.9 Associate's 7.7 8.1 7.7 6.2 5.1 Bachelor's 30.0 32.5 16.2 22.2 33.5 Graduate studies 13.4 14.8 7.0 7.3 17.2 PSE attendance patterns Maintained continuous enrollment 2 62.9 67 43 49.8 64.4 Attended multiple schools 2 30 30.3 28.2 26.2 31.7 Transferred from 2- to 4-year sector 3 31.9 35.7 18.9 21.4 36.9 Took time off 4 27.7 24.5 40.2 37.5 29.5 Part-time attendance 4 38.6 37.1 51.8 37 38.5 Changed majors 4 32.4 32.8 28.8 32.3 34.2 Time for Bachelor’s completion 5 Within 4 years 41.6 43.9 23 24.3 44.8 Up to 5 years 33.7 33.6 34.5 41 25.5


More than 5 years 24.7 22.5 42.4 34.7 29.7 Sources: US Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS: 88/2000, 2003-348 & 2003-402). 1 Universe is made up of students whose first true institution attended was either a 2-year or a 4-year institution. Sector was ascer-tained by accessing IPEDS information for true first institution attended which was merged to this file(NELS 2003-402). 2 Based on college transcripts contained in NELS 2003-402 (CONTIN & INSTCOMB, respectively). 3 Universe is made of students whose first institution attended was a community college (TRUFIRST) and who transferred some cred-its (ATRANSFR variable with values 1, 2 and 3). 4 Based on self-reported data contained in NELS 2003-348 (F4ETKOFF, F4EPARTT & F4ECHMAJ, respectively). 5 Based on college transcripts (BACHTME).

Appendix B. Methodology


Methodology

Database. The sample for this study was drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of

1988 8th grade cohort. The NELS:88 tracks nearly 15,000 1988 eight graders with follow-

up surveys in 1990 (10th grade), 1992 (12th grade), 1994 (2 years out of high school), and

2000 (8 years out of high school). Two databases were employed in this report: the

NELS: 88/2000 (CD# 2003-348) and the Postsecondary transcript study (NELS: 88/2000

(PETS), CD# 2003-402). The PETS reports the results of an exhaustive examination of col-

lege transcripts from all postsecondary institutions student reported attendance between

1992 and 2000 (Adelman, Berkovits & Owins, 2003).

Weighting. The 2000 panel weight F4BYPNWT was used to estimate the number of 8th

graders in the population that participated in both the base year and the fourth followed

up that took place 12 years later (approximately 2.9 million). This weight was selected

to maintain consistency with the results produced by Ingles, Curtin, Kaufman and Chen

(2002) who examined postsecondary experiences of the 8th grade class twelve years later.

Standard errors. Due to the complex stratification procedures used in selecting the cases,

the AM statistical software (American Institutes for Research, 2002) was used in estimating

the correct standard errors for all variables reported in the tables. Building upon Mini-

mum Maximum Likelihood procedures (MML), AM produces standard errors corrected

for biases due complicated sampling procedures as those employed in NELS:88.

Variables

Background. Indicators for background characteristics relied on variables used in Ingels

and associates (2002) as well as those employed in Adelman et al., (2003), corresponding

to Gender (F4SEX) and ethnicity (RACE4). The ethnicity variable embraces standard race

categories in 2000. In this study, the ethnic categories examined included: White (1), Af-

rican American (2), Hispanic (3), and Asian American (4). Native Americans, due to

their small number, were excluded from the analyses.


Parental Income. Parents' reported 1991 gross family income form all sources before taxes

(F2P74). To maintain consistency with Berkner and Chavez (1997), the 13 income catego-

ries were collapsed into three: low (less than $25,000), middle ($25,000 to $74,999) and

high ($75,000 or more).

Planned for college at 8th grade. Created by (Berkner & Chavez, 1997), BYS45 identifies the

highest degree planned to obtain when the subject was in the 8th grade.

College Qualification Index. Developed by Berkner and Chavez (1997), the college-

qualification index (CQCOMV2) attempts to approximate college admissions criteria.

Thus, the index is based on cumulative academic course GPA, senior class rank, the 1992

NELS aptitude test scores, and the SAT and ACTS scores. Moreover, Berkner and

Chavez adjusted this index to account for having taken rigorous high school academic

work. The college qualification index ranges from 1 (not qualified) to 5 (very highly

qualified). We found the college-qualification index to correlate significantly with the

HIGHMATH, a scale developed after Adelman's HSB/So HIGHMATH variable (1999).

Cabrera and La Nasa (2001) reported a large correlation CQCOMV2 and HIGHMATH

(r= .723). Berkner and Chavez reported that meeting minimal college qualifications sig-

nificantly predicts college enrollment. In this report, the college-qualification index was

broken into three categories corresponding to 1) not qualified, 2) minimally qualified

and 3) qualified.

Highest mathematics in high school. Adelman and associates developed this variable, la-

beled HIGHMATH in CD# 2003-402, based on high school and postsecondary tran-

scripts.

High school completion. It is based on PETSGTYP, a variable derived from an examination

of both high school and college transcripts (see CD# 2003-402).

At-risk factors. Ten indicators were employed. Nine of them were extracted from CD#

2003-348 indicating whether the 8th grader came from a single-parent family


(BYFCOMP=4 or 5), her parental income was less than $15,000 (BYFAMINC), had sib-

lings who dropped out from high school (asked in the 10th grade, BYP6), had parents

with no high school diploma (BYPARED=1), was home alone for more than three hours

a day (BYS41=4), had limited English proficiency (BYLEP=1), changed school two or

more times from 1st to 8th grade (BYP40), had average grades of C or lower from 6th to

8th grade (BYGRD68), and repeated an earlier grade from 1st to 8th grade (BYS74). The

tenth indicator, having children during high school years (CHLD92), was extracted from

PETS.

First type of postsecondary institution attended. This variable was derived from two PETS’

variables that track the true first postsecondary institution attended (REFINST) and the

basic combination of postsecondary institutions attended (INSTCOMB).

Highest PSE degree attained by 2000. Postsecondary attainment was ascertained from col-

lege transcripts (HDEG).

Month between HS completion & PSE attendance. Based on college transcripts, BATCHME,

tracks the true total elapsed time to a bachelor’s degree.

Selectivity of 1st PSE attended. Secured from IPEDS information, REFSELCT signifies the

selectivity of the true first postsecondary institution attended.

Sector of 1st PSE attended and average tuition. Type of control and average tuition for first

institution attended was ascertained from IPEDS data.

PSE attendance patterns. Six indicators were employed. Taking time off, part time atten-

dance and changing majors were based on self-reported information contained in NELS

2003-348 (F4ETKOFF, F4EPARTT &F4ECHMAJ, respectively). The variable transferred

from 2-year sector to 4-year sector is made up of subjects whose first institution attended

was a community college (see First type of postsecondary institution attended), earned

some credits and subsequently transferred to a 4-year institution (ATRANSFR variable

with values 1, 2, and 3). The indicators of maintaining continuous enrollment in postsec-


ondary institutions and attending multiple institutions were derived from the college

transcript database’s (NELS 2003-402) variables CONTIN and INSTCOMB, respectively.

Time for bachelor’s degree. This attainment variable was ascertained from the college tran-

script database’s (NELS 2003-402) variable BACHTME, which index the true total

elapsed time it took to complete a bachelor’s degree.

References

Adelman, B., Berkovits, I., & Owins, J.. (2003). Postsecondary attainment, attendance, curriculum, and performance: Selected results from NELS:88/2000 Postsecondary tran-script study (PETS), 2000. (NCES 2003-394). Washington, DC.: U.S. Department of Edu-cation. National Center for Education Statistics.

Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor’s degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Of-fice of Education Research and Improvement.

American Institutes for Research (2002). User guide: AM statistical software. Washing-ton, DC.: American Institutes for Research.

Berkner, L. K., & Chavez, L. (1997, October). Access to postsecondary education for the 1992 high school graduates. Statistical Analysis Report, NCES 98-105. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Na-tional Center for Education Statistics.

Cabrera, A. F. & La Nasa, S. M. (2000). Understanding the college choice of disadvan-taged students. New Directions for Institutional Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hafner, Anne, Ingels, Steven, Schneider, Barbara, and Stevenson, David (1990). A Profile of The American Eighth Grader: NELS:-88 Student Descriptive Summary. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Ingels, S.J., Curtin, T.R., Kaufman, P., Alt, M.N. & Chen, X. (2002). Coming of age in the 1990s: The Eight-grade Class of 1988 12 years later. (NCES 2002-321). Washington, DC.: U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics.


McDonough, P. (1997). Choosing colleges: How social class and schools structure oppor-tunity. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Pelavin, Sol H., and Kane, Michael (1990). Changing the Odds. Factors Increasing Access to College. New York, NY: College Entrance Examination Board.

latino youth and the pathway to college - eric · 2014. 6. 9. · latino youth and the pathway to...

Documents